1. Technical Field
Specific matter disclosed herein relates to the field of wireless networks.
2. Background Information and Description of Related Art
Advancements in technology have enabled small, wireless devices to interact with one another to form wireless networks, e.g., mesh or managed networks and ad hoc wireless networks. An ad hoc wireless network, as compared to a managed network, is a wireless network in which wireless communications occur directly between wireless communication devices such as a peer to peer network without a managed node, e.g., between laptops or other wireless devices. A managed wireless network is the type of network that is found in a specific location such as a coffee shop or at a wireless access point of a home network, i.e., a “hotspot.”
Wireless devices such as the wireless devices of an ad hoc network can be deployed in various environments where a wired network would not be feasible, such as an unwired industrial area. By establishing an ad hoc network in such an environment, the total cost of ownership associated with a network can be reduced by eliminating the need for wiring. Testing of wireless networks may be desired for, among other things, testing of packet loss when the packets are transmitted from node to node across a communication link. However, current test methodologies for networks, such as Ethernet (versions of IEEE Std. 802.3), are less useful in an ad hoc wireless network, where each node in the network may have different packet loss characteristics.
For example, current test methodologies incorporate endpoints in the network and assume a reliable medium for measuring test results across a network. Existing test systems ignore the fact that each node of a wireless ad hoc network may have different packet loss characteristics because the transmission medium is often inconsistent from point to point. Thus, it would be desirable to measure the per node packet loss at each node in a wireless network in order to determine the overall mesh network viability.
In some wireless networks, it is desirable to measure network viability. Mesh network viability is measured with endpoint nodes and per node packet loss. The term “per node packet loss” as referred to herein refers to the packet loss per node in a wireless network. The term “endpoint node” as referred to herein refers to a node of a wireless network that is used in the calculation of packet loss in a wireless network. The term “mesh network viability” as referred to herein represents the cumulative packet loss of the overall network, i.e., packet loss for all nodes of the wireless network, versus the single node packet loss generation of a wireless network endpoint node.
Because a number of the existing wireless technologies are battery powered, packet loss may be a drain on the batteries. One source of battery drain is the re-transmission of lost packets. In a wireless network, it is possible for network topology to create excessive packet loss between nodes in the wireless network because, for example, an obstruction is present or introduced between two nodes, or excessive network packet traffic is using a particular node to carry out network communications between a node and a server.
For example, if three nodes in a wireless network are routing packets through a single node, that node may be overloaded. Because the node is overloaded, a significant number of the packets from that portion of the network may be lost. Depending on where the test endpoint is placed in the network, the current methodologies for testing network packet loss may not see this issue. If the endpoint is placed in such a way that the overloaded node is not part of the test, the test may report that the link/node has a low packet loss and therefore the network has a low packet loss in general, and as such, erroneously so, may be assumed as not needing servicing. Examples of routing protocols that run on technologies that can be battery powered are DSDV (Destination-Sequenced distance Vectoring) and AODV (Ad Hoc On Demand Vectoring).
Many other problems and disadvantages of the prior art will become apparent to one skilled in the art after comparing such prior art with the present invention as described herein.